njn63

I'm pretty sure the bar in the OP is not a Sparco. The image of a harness bar on the Sparco website shows one that has the attachment plates welded on instead of attaching with a pivot:


I have a feeling it was a cheap bar like: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/96-00...Q5fAccessories
Note the weight of 6 pounds 3 ounces. .120 2.5" tubing is just over 3 pounds a foot and a design with pivots will be weaker.

Another factor to consider is that with this happening on the street, there is a good chance the belts weren't tensioned properly. This would of contributed significantly to the passenger getting ejected.

logic factory

caveat: i did not get beyond the first page so maybe someone else tried being the "voice of reason".

its important when trying to draw conclusions to consider as many variables as possible. that being said i think there are some rather large factors being neglected just to drive a point home.
the mob mentality seems strong and well established on this issue so ill sit it out.

johnjw

are there more pictures????? where did this one picture come from??

Stinkycheezmonky

The original point I was trying to make, but did not explicitly state was basically that this COULD happen to you if using a harness bar. However many people mentioned that there are numerous variables at play are absolutely correct, and without knowing the details of the situation its impossible to lay blame solely on that (the bar). My primary concern has to do with the manner in which the bar bent, not with the ejection of the passenger (as they are really two separate issues). A properly designed bar would NOT have bent like that, regardless of what happened to the passenger(s) or if/how they were injured. Still, we all appreciate critical thinking here

The research is pointing towards the bar being an ebay knockoff, rather than a genuine Sparco unit. We all know the kind of compromises that often go into such a product, and that could largely, if not completely, be the cause of such a catastrophic failure. However, from this one could also infer the dangers of using a generic (or possibly big-name) rear strut bar as a point of attachment for shoulder straps. Those bars are DEFINITELY not designed for resisting such a lateral load.

Ultimately, my point with any safety-related issue is this: know what you're dealing with, educate yourself on potential issues or consequences, and accept responsibility for your choices.

-As for more pics, no, I don't have any others.
-As for the harness breaking, I saw no mention of that from my secondary source (yes, secondary, and as such inherently less reliable than the primary), and so assume that it was not related to the results of the collision. In contrast, there was mention of the steering wheel bending, which is not related to the function of the bar.

Supa Troopa

I agree, they are non-synonymous. I think there is a lot of over analyzing in defense of the harness bar. It does the job of holding the harness for an event such as autocross, but that is about the only place you should see one. I would like to see more pictures where collisions occurred to compare photos. It does appear to be an ebay harness bar to me, but that is my opinion. All in all, no more comparing to cages, unless its that cusco cage because that will probably do the same thing.. again my opinion.

Stinkycheezmonky

Actually, the Cusco comparison is an excellent one, as I think almost all (if not ALL) the joints in a Cusco are similar to the cheap heim joints seen in this one.

MBellRacing

There are obvious problems with the picture, all of which could have been avoided with different equipment. I've NEVER seen someone get ejected in a properly-fit harness system. Seats have broken, whole cars torn in half, 100G impacts-- everyone stayed where they should be, alive or not. If you move forward in the car, you've installed something wrong!

Another thing I see very few of: nets. Yes, they are annoying, but in Grand-Am we're required to run 3 (THREE!!!) nets inside the car. The reason is that harnesses best hold you in longitudinally, not laterally. Seats break quite often (as I mentioned previously) and the harnesses don't keep you from swinging back and forth sideways on a side impact. The reason nets aren't required in some time trial-type classes is because there's less chance of being T-boned. Though true, I think this is a poor reason to not protect yourself. Modern safety understanding guides us to have one left side net (driver side) and one triangle net going down the backbone of the car, keeping you on your side of the car in a bad crash.

...just a thought.

FlewByU352

I am posting this on Facebook for all my friends to see. Why you ask? Because almost every car show or w/e there is someone with a harness bar and all these other bolt in braces and I cringe and always shake my head then explain why they are so bad if you get into an accident. Everyone always says "I dont care it looks cool". Some will never learn I guess. I read the thread and talk of HANS devices. My neighbor had a 70G impact at Daytona a few years ago http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6Vko33ZFp0 The damage from the wreck made you think there is no way someone survived that but the HANS device and proper safety equipment had him walking out of the infield medical center later that night. Currently they are testing another restraint system like HANS that will also be acceptable for use in racing. I cant think of the name off hand but my neighbor wants to get me one for road racing. Heck I was in a karting accident before where I was nudged and hit the wall at 50MPH. Even that left bruises and I was sore for a bit but the 5 point harness and head restraint kept me in there tight and I walked away and raced the next heat and still posted the fastest lap times winning haha. If you have ever been in an accident you know how important safety is.

grumblemarc

iTrader: (4)

I don't race. I don't Autocross. Hell, since I work from home I barely get to even drive my car any more.

I am still trying to gather actual facts both pro and con for the use of a harness bar and quite honestly I am not finding ANYTHING on the con side other than people on forums making claims that they are not safe. I'm looking for hard data of harness bar failures and not just speculation and hearsay. If someone can show me concrete evidence that a well made harness bar simply is not safe I'll take mine off in an instant and scrap it right now.

Stinkycheezmonky

Matt, I like your window/side net suggestion. Unfortunately, a lot of DE organizations specifically don't allow the use of these because of point-bys given out the window.

You had a 5-point harness in a kart? Where was this?

There's a guy here who rolled his CRX on track and had the roof come down on him. 89Civic something or other. Anyway, there is the idea that a harness bar with harness will keep you nice and upright in the event of a rollover, whereupon your head and neck become the pivot point for all that weight (potentially). There have been LOTS of rollovers where the roof has been crushed completely down to the doors, and lots of great pictures showing this (E36 M3 was a GREAT one). I don't know that studies have been done to document this, but the physics of it make sense to me.

grumblemarc

iTrader: (4)

Well I'm still searching. If I find anything solid on the con side of the argument I'll post up.

dirty19

iTrader: (1)

Dood stop with the National Lab mentality. Its small, flimsy and no possible way of holding you in the car in a substantial impact.
Common sense applies here. Two media to look at.. small metal bar hollow at that. Big cage tube hollow yes, but welded to the interior of a car, and other support structures.
Since you don't race or auto-x how do you draw your conclusions?

grumblemarc

iTrader: (4)

Sorry. I'm not taking anyone's word for anything. I've seen full rollcages fail so what's the point? If harness bars were so unsafe why am I not seeing any pictures or getting any real reports other than this one that was posted out of context? No evidence. Only hearsay like yours. And you keep saying common sense like that is supposed to give your argument weight?

I'm not drawing ANY conclusions. Right now everything is up in the air for me on this subject. Where do you see that I said that a harness bar was safe or not safe? I said simply that I have a harness bar that was custom built for my car and came upon this thread and now need to find out if I needed to remove it. Because I had no idea that before now something touted as a safety device may not actually be safe. So far I have found NO concrete evidence stating any negative. So if you have anything other than the conjecture that you've been parroting from those that have gone before you please furnish it. I'll do the same if I find any.

njn63

Then why do you need a harness? A stock 3 point with an airbag is more than adequate on the street.
As Matt said, you're locking yourself in place with a harness and there is nothing to keep the roof up in a rollover except your head. Some cars are better than others in rollovers but it's not worth the risk to me.

96-00 Civic rollover:

dirty19

iTrader: (1)

I have seen harness bars bend with out being in an impact at HPDE's or race weekends.
Simply because they don't have the structural integrity to hold the weight of the person inside the car.
They may not of been to the drastic degree of the one posted here but a bend is a bend nonetheless, and at that point the device has been compromised.
Would I continue to use it... No
How can you say that the OP posted this out of context??
It was used as a point of warning so to speak that "we" who do race, or those who do auto-x or those who may start HPDE should beware to the danger of placing your trust in something that isn't designed for safety. Kids use these to put a harness in their street cars.
They get the false sense of security that because its a harness that it is safer than their stock restraints.
Common sense still applies. Compare a cage, or roll bar to a thin flimsy piece of metal that wouldn't support your weight if you stood on it.
You can trust in your "custom made" device that's your prerogative.
I would highly advise anyone who wanted to use one to find a better alternative.
If your car is for the street only, place more trust in the factory system your car came with. No need to jeopardize your health just to be cool.

grumblemarc

iTrader: (4)

The only argument so far that would sway me would be the one for rollovers. So far everything being said is second hand and hearsay. "I heard" and "I saw". Nothing offered in the way of actual proof. All I'm saying if harness bar failure was as prevalent as is being claimed by some how come I can find NOTHING about it? I'm just trying to get both sides of the story and so far coming up short on the con side of things.

As for out of context. Yes. The unidentified bar failed. That should have been all that was said. But then it was added that the passenger was ejected. This attempts to imply that somehow the harness bar was at fault for the ejection. Yes the bar failed. So did a lot of other stuff in that car from what I saw.

So can someone PLEASE come up with solid proof? Once upon a time people were convinced that the world was flat until it was proven it wasn't.

MBellRacing

We'll bring Casper the ghost in and he'll tell you, first hand, that his harness bar wasn't up to the job. Look. You sound like you're trying to validate a trip on the Hindenburg. "Sorry, I'm not taking anybody's word for anything. Nobody can show me any evidence that hydrogen is any less dangerous than helium. I've seen full helium blimps fail....." Honestly, a whole blimp full of people that trusted a common safety standard. Oh the calamity!

I've been in a bunch of crashes, and seen even more. I've NEVER (read: EVER, EVER, EVER) been or seen someone ejected in a proper roll cage/harness system. I've NEVER (read: EVER, EVER, EVER, EVER, EVER) seen a properly-built roll cage fail under conventional circumstances. If you hit the edge of a wall at 146mph (Scott Pruett, 2008) and your car gets cut in half, then yes, that cage failed (the whole car did). If you're defending poor engineering by bringing up more poor engineering, then you should probably give up now.

Here's a famous example of a properly-built roll cage. This is my former teammate Joey Hand in a VERY bad crash. His harnesses stretched, he lost a glove and a shoe, but he walked away from this-- if a bit bruised.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRC3rv1ZHj4

Think about the construction of a harness bar, think about how it mounts at only two points, often through plastic, often to a flexible member of the car. There is NO WAY that could sustain something like this.

If you're on the street use the street stuff. I've personally seen the GM proving grounds where they crash test cars. I've been in a number street crashes and can testify to the safety standard to which those are built. Yes you can submarine, yes you can sustain a neck injury, yes you can break an ankle, but no, there's no safer option if you're not willing to install a full roll cage and drive on the street with a helmet on.

dirty19

iTrader: (1)

Thanks Matt... if that doesn't sum it up then the dueling banjos should start playing now!

grumblemarc

iTrader: (4)

That's all I was asking for! A little proof! What is the crime in wanting proof instead of taking someone's word for something? Sorry but I don't know any of you from Adam so I wanted something a bit more tangible than a few posts on a forum.

I'm not trying to validate anything.

dirty19

iTrader: (1)

Adam is Stinkycheezmonkey the OP!
A very knowledgeable person when it comes to cars.

We don't like to talk out of our behinds.. we do speak from experience though.

Matt love the "trip on the Hindenburg" deal. Made for some good humor and comparison to things unrelated.

grumblemarc

iTrader: (4)

Pardon me for not taking "Because I told you so." at face value.

FlewByU352

Yep, it had a rollbar and everything. It was pretty serious but with a track that has no grass run off or anything its just all barriers I think it was necessary. It got pretty scary when you would hit the straights and accelerate that fast then come into a turn without really needing to apply the brakes much. Pulled some serious G's in the turns. 1 heat and your soaked with sweat because keeping these things on the track and off the walls being competetive was quite the workout.

Stinkycheezmonky

Just for fun, let's expand on potential physics theories, since you sound like an educated person.
-Harness bar mounts to B-pillar, whether it is bolted, welded, glued, or held on with zipties.
-Potentially, the B-pillar could be caused to collapse from a variety of directional forces (rollover, side impact, hard enough front impact, etc).
-Because the B-pillars are the only point of attachment for the harness bar, when that point is compromised in both strength and position, the harness bar is no longer able to act as it was originally designed.
-The bar itself may not fail (what if it was a solid steel rod 3" in diameter? That would not likely bend), but you would probably still be picking your teeth out of the dash.

Granted, a good enough impact in the right place will cause ANYTHING to "fail". But with a cage/rollbar that failure is less likely to occur given the multiple points of attachment.

I apologize for not going into more detail into my opinion previously. I sometimes forget that its been years since I last explained myself, or presented evidence for a particular discussion, and take that for granted.

Supa Troopa

Holy hell!! That makes me scared to go get groceries! lol

2fst4VWimaHonda

rrruuuffff